Is this a good book?

why does this get asked every week.

I enjoyed it.

>>7868284
It's enjoyable, but probably not the best of Vonnegut's works, even though it's his most famous. So if you've read others by him it might not compare. It's a great intro into his catalog though

It's alright. There isn't as much in asynchronicity as Vonnegut thinks there is though. All it really does is annoy the reader.

Nah

Pretty good. Won't offer you anything exceptionally deep but it's a light and entertaining read while still being relatively literary. I like Mother Night and Breakfast of Champions more.

I've never read it OP, but Cat's Cradle is well worth reading.

>>7868284
>vonnegut
Vonnegut is Reddit:the writer. The closest I can come to liking him is Galapagos, Mother Night, Jailbird or Cat's Cradle and even those are just not very good. They all have elements that are interesting, but they're ultimately pointless shallow books.

Good, not great

i really liked it. give it a read.

Vonnegut is a hack, along with that whole genre of alt-highschoolcore: Orwell, Huxley, Bradbury, etc.

Vonnegut's characters are shallow, his themes are sophomoric, and his prose is artless. A hack who somehow memed himself into relevance - this feat being far more impressive than anything he ever wrote.

>>7868478

Can you explain he he's "Reddit: The Writer"? I'm not quite sure what you mean.

I'm not saying he's not - I'm just not following you.

>>7868629
Superficial gleaning of science, atheism, literary depth, social commentary, etc. that is ultimately the conduit for a hackneyed series of archetypes and jokes in easily digestible small bursts.

>>7868629

...how long have you been on this board?

>>7868654

About a year, I'm willing to learn.

Good read. He has other books that might be worth checking out instead, though.

>>7868478
>Reddit:the writer
I'm glad I'm not quite that cynical. Slaughterhouse-Five is a masterpiece. My favorite book.

>>7869518
you know what website to go back to then then

if you really have slaughterhouse five as your favorite book you're just not very well read

>>7869521
>you're just not very well read
That's true, but I wouldn't trust a person who doesn't enjoy it.

>>7869544
you're not gonna have a good time on /lit/ then the vast majority of people here dont think much of this book, because, frankly, it's just not that impressive once you've read more

>>7869555
Well it's good enough for this pleb. Perhaps it's The Dark Knight of literature.

>>7869555
you realize that sh5 is one of the most popular books on this board right?

>>7869558
Not him but please don't say this

>>7869558
Remember that thread where lit users took a survey, and the results showed that 40% of lit users are virgins..

well you're in that 40%

>>7869587
That's true as well.

>>7869576
not really. go back to r/books

>>7869555
Sometimes people don't need the approval of their peers and can live their own life.

>>7869624
He literally said he cant trust people who dont like it

>>7869640
I know, I read that comment.

>>7868284
I didn't think it was as good as I thought it was going to be. I assume, it started the whole fragmentary thing.
But, Burroughs, did that already. And Dick and Heinlein had the scfi shit covered so...

Over rated

>>7868284
It is a good read - it's nothing deeply profound, nothing that will change your life, but rather a entertaining, simple, and at times thought-provoking read infused with a healthy dose of black humor

>>7868284
I liked it. So it goes.

>>7868284

> shitting on Kurt Vonnegut

OP, please don't listen to these memes. When it comes to satire, Vonnegut is easily accessible and fun to read. I wouldn't call Vonnegut "shallow" by a long shot, his writing is playful and mocking but rooted in truth.

/lit/ doesn't books that can be understood by most people. It makes them feel less special.

>all these vonnegut defenders

I thought the leddit invasion thing was a boogeyman but holy shit it's real

>>7870603
then please explain what you find to be so appalling about Vonnegut's work

>>7870625
didn't you hear? he's reddit!!!!!

>There are people who literally use reddit as a pejorative

Like, these people exist. Fucking lmao

>>7870629
I love how retarded this whole reddit "invasion" concept is
> some people that go on reddit happen to like Slaughterhouse-Five
> "0/10 fucking pleb tier garbage actually kill yourself if you read this book"

It's hipster trash

It's enjoyable. I don't claim it as one of my favorites but I really don't see the need to trash it so much.

>this whole thread
ugh...

There's this one guy on youtube who says this book is better than any Pynchon book

>>7869555
I read this book for the first time ten years ago and recently gave it another read after a decade of experience and multiple literature degrees, which, as you might imagine, requires a lot of reading on top of my own pleasure reading. It impressed me more the second time.

Any other bright theories?

>>7871945
you're a tasteless pleb

that was easy

also

>gave it another read after a decade of experience and multiple literature degrees, which, as you might imagine, requires a lot of reading on top of my own pleasure reading

i don't believe you

A A Y L M A O
A Y L M A O
Y L M A O
L M A O
M A O
A O
O

P E C K E R S
E C K E R S
C K E R S
K E R S
E R S
R S
S

SO IT GOES!!!!!!!!

How do you pull the reddit argument IRL?
I was talking to a grille yesterday and she told me that she like Atlas Shrugged. I told her that it was not a good book. She asked why. My /lit/ instinct was to shout REDDIT, but I was at a loss for words, as doing so would be strange IRL.
What do you do in such situations?

O
A O
M A O
L M A O
Y L M A O
Y Y L M A O
A Y Y L M A O
Y Y L M A O
Y L M A O
L M A O
M A O
A O
O

>>7871968
learn how to think for yourself, for one

>>7871968
do it anyway

ascend into the ultimate sperglord

>>7871975
>>>/reddit/

>>7871947
>can't believe anyone on lit actually studies literature
>believes anyone who likes things he doesn't is Reddit invader

Cancerous as can be.

>>7871990
Not him but you sound really stupid right now.

I liked it, it's only like a hundred pages, just read it.

File: dfw60.png (461KB, 652x549px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 652x549px

>>7868287
high schoolers browse this board

File: thedude.jpg (98KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1280x720px

Can I ask you all a question /lit/ ?

I'm not sure if anyone else noticed this but if you did then let me know.

Does anyone here think that billy's narration was surprisingly dispassionate and factual? And instead of it making the book/events/story cold, it somehow added to the emotion and feel of the book? It added weight to the horror of war? Maybe it had something to do with reading about a naive, innocent person caught in the midst of all of it? and that instead of narrating it in a hamfisted manner that appeals to emotion, billy just told it as it is and let ourselves feel however we can about it?

Or am I wrong?

>>7873211
Of course there was no emotion. Why be emotional about a moment in time? There's nothing that can be done about it, and there will be an infinite number of moments just like it. So it goes.

>>7868284
it's fun and accessible
>>7868287
most people on 4chan are like 16 no matter what anybody says
>>7869558
yeah that's pretty right
>>7870636
look at this cool rad dude he's an edgy hecker he doesn't agree with a thing everybody look and care he even ends things with lmao nice

>>7868284
Quite any other Vonnegut book is better. Namely Cat's Cradle, Sirens of Titan and Mechanical Piano (latter is the best dystopian story I know of)

>>7871945

not who you replied to but..

>multiple literature degrees.

fucking why? do you LIKE burning money or what?

>>7868284
It is good i don't get all the hate.

>>7873211
This >>7873289 is basically the whole point of the book. Billy views the world in the Tramalfadorian way so that he can detach himself from all the horrors he experienced in the war. He makes it that nothing affects him so that the war can't hurt him anymore.

>>7871968
Why didn't you ask her why she liked it and then just find fault in her justifications for why it was good?

>>7874520
That would have required him to actually read the book.

>>7868284
yes

File: Gravity's Comfy.jpg (87KB, 400x257px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 400x257px

>>7868284
>>7868284
IF YOU ENJOYED READING, OR THOUGHT THIS BOOK WAS GOOD IN ANY FASHION, PLEASE LEAVE THIS BOARD. YOU DO NOT BELONG HERE. I'M CERTAIN THERE ARE OTHER COMMUNITIES MORE SUITABLE TO YOUR.... TASTES